But if your getting unburnt fuel on a good mapped car with say 200bhp I don't see how bigger injectors is gonna give anything but more unburnt fuel and more smoke? Obviously boost asmnd other variables will be adjusted along with this?!

Could a high pressure fuel pump increase power any?

Well, the bigger injectors flow more during the same time. Time is measured in degrees because camshaft "powers" the injectors so its logical that way.

So, if you have a hole the size of X and it flows Y amount in time Z. When you increase X, keep Z constant, Y increases as well. That way you get more injection through in the same time because the injector is bigger, and that way you get more horsies.

Its a pump injector system, no "high pressure fuel pump" to be added there.

wilsy, it's not how much fuel is injected so much as WHEN that fuel is injected that is paramount.

Exactly, or even more accurately, how quickly we can flow a certain amount of fuel through the injector.

On standard injectors and camshaft, we can flow enough fuel for 210-or-so hp during the time it takes the piston to move up and a bit down whilst still staying within the injector cam lobe (there is no point to energize the injector when the cam is not pushing the injector piston).

This is turning into a very interesting read! :coffee:

It also nice to know how the map has been developed for my own car too

Exactly, or even more accurately, how quickly we can flow a certain amount of fuel through the injector.

On standard injectors and camshaft, we can flow enough fuel for 210-or-so hp during the time it takes the piston to move up and a bit down whilst still staying within the injector cam lobe (there is no point to energize the injector when the cam is not pushing the injector piston).

So if 210bhp is the max, if I was to get higher-flowing injectors off Darkside Development (70% more flow), how much more power could I expect out of my spec or is the turbo at its limit?

While I never did get my head totally around the post above, here's how I understand it:

If you bought 70% more flow injectors from Darkside, you'd then be able to get up to whatever the max for your turbo is (if we assume that a stage 2 PD130 hybrid flows enough air to make 240bhp when matched with appropriate fuelling and a PD150 flows enough for 260), because Mikko's fuel calculations for 260 only require 35% extra flow. So you would get more power and then move the "weak point" to another component, in this case the turbo. However your injectors would still have more to give, so you could get more complicated and fit a proper big turbo rather than a hybrid for more airflow and then get close to 300.

That's pretty simplistic though, and assumes the fact that the Darkside injectors can consistently flow 70% more in any given time (i.e. if they can consistently flow 70% more at, say 25 degree SOI and 36.7 degrees injection duration which is obviously a safe amount to use as it's what Mikko said he's used above). I guess then another remap would take care of the SOI and duration so you're only getting the 35% extra fuel you require (so duration would start slightly later and stop slightly sooner) to match with the airflow from the turbo.

This is turning into a very interesting read! :coffee:

It also nice to know how the map has been developed for my own car too

Agreed. Hopefully the guy who started the thread asking for opinions about Shark has been keeping up, I think this thread sells them quite well

This is turning into a very interesting read! :coffee:

It also nice to know how the map has been developed for my own car too

+1 on that.

When Ben done my custom map i asked for as max as he was willing to go

So i'm unsure what values i have on mine

I'm trying to avoid that, hence my question regarding the start of injection and injection duration. They are not matters of opinion, and will tell me immediately if such horsepower is possible. I'm here to discuss tech issues, I'm not the business mind in this business

I'll try to explain what I mean a bit more.

This explanation is simplified alot so its not 100% as straight forward, but I'll try to be as accurate as possible.

On a PD engine ECU, you can alter the start of main injection and duration of the injection. These two values determine the efficient injection period, during which time the fuel must enter the combustion chamber.

If you advance injection, you also increase peak cylinder pressure, and you also run out of the cam lobe.

So to get more fuel, you need to inject more, thus you need to increase the injection duration.

With 27deg SOI, that is, as early as possible (too early actually, I dont like to run them so advanced because the engine starts to make funny noises), the longest duration where injection is still effective is 38 degrees. After that the car starts to lose power.

Gavins car runs 25deg SOI and 36,7deg duration and we dynoed it to just over 200hp which I feel is accurate and close to what it should do.

Standard injectors produce 60mg/stroke at 28,5deg duration, so 36,7deg gives apprx. 75mg/stroke, which equals just over 200hp. To get enough fuel for 260hp, you'd need to inject 30% more than what we did at 200ish hp, that is, 97,5mg/stroke, which would require 62,5% longer injection than standard 60mg, which means over 46 degree injection duration. Now, when we remember how important it is to get the fuel into combustion "bowl" in the piston instead of just injecting it to the cylinder, there is no way injecting so long will cause anything but unburnt diesel.

As standard, PD130 injects 47mg/stroke at 4000rpm. If we simplify things (and on a diesel, this works surprisingly well...), you need 50% more injected fuel to reach 50% more hp. So 70,5mg equals 195hp at 4000rpm, so our 75mg at 4000rpm and 200hp dyno print should in theory give 206hp (we dynoed another PD130 day before that to 207hp with same setup, Gavins car might have slightly more wear on the cam lobe or something like that, it would explain the small difference there).

The maths works surprisingly well if you think about it, its not 100% linear of course, but 2x standard hp = 2x standard injection = 94mg/stroke which is very close to my "calculated" value of 97,5mg and it also matches very close to our dyno figures at 200hp.

Bosio R783's produce (measured) about 30-35% more fuel than standard injectors, and the highest reliable results I've seen have been in the 260-270hp territory, again confirming these rough calculations.

Just thought I'd quote this, to bump it. Straight from a mappers mouth. The information here is worth it's weight in gold! So much knowledge here, well done pal.

Agreed. Hopefully the guy who started the thread asking for opinions about Shark has been keeping up, I think this thread sells them quite well

lol yes have been keeping up and sifting through all the not reali helpfull thinngs lol dint doubt them in the first place always heard good things just a couple tht av have little things happen tht can be fixed i.e pipes poppin off and fix with a few cable ties but all in all cant waint to get it done :p:P

While I have no wish to map my current car, (I might the Polo) Shark Performance (Google purposes ) are painting an excellent impression of themselves here, certainly making it seem worth the several hour drive for me.

Plus, as said, it's turning into a good interesting and informative view. The openness of Shark Performance is coming as a nice change too, esp. in public.

Edited 2 September, 201114 yr by TriggerFish

The openness of Shark Performance is coming as a nice change too, esp. in public.

It's something we pride ourselves on, openness and honesty are top of our agenda. We'd rather tell the truth and lose a job than talk the talk just to close a deal.

We'd rather tell the truth and lose a job than talk the talk just to close a deal.

And I'd rather pay more for an honest service.

Edited 2 September, 201114 yr by TriggerFish

While I have no wish to map my current car, (I might the Polo) Shark Performance (Google purposes ) are painting an excellent impression of themselves here, certainly making it seem worth the several hour drive for me.

Plus, as said, it's turning into a good interesting and informative view. The openness of Shark Performance is coming as a nice change too, esp. in public.

+1

The Shark Stage 3 TFSI package has now become a lot more desirable in my eyes

Iv owned my vrs for a year and spent the hole time debating where to go............... shark remap for me, some great info and im now happy spending the money knowing its been done right!

From a slightly different point of view, how much power and torque is it worth having in a fabia?

Taking the cost of modifications out of the equation, there has to be a point in a normal 'daily driver' vrs where additional power and torque is pointless and a waste of time as you won't be able to get traction and you'll be spinning the wheels in 2nd and 3rd in the dry?

Don't get me wrong, I love my little fabia, but it's not exactly the best platform for massive power!

For example, In real life how much quicker is a hybrid turbo car than a mapped standard turbo car ( fabia vrs specifically)

All these reasons are exactly why I`m so pleased to be have found Unit 18 (not that i`m adverse to Shark, just found U18 first ). Its nice to see small honest business doing well and getting some recognition, as others have said, i`m far happier to pay for decent work, but the bonus is, they are normally cheaper to start with anyway!

Keep up the good work guys

Matt

From a slightly different point of view, how much power and torque is it worth having in a fabia?

Taking the cost of modifications out of the equation, there has to be a point in a normal 'daily driver' vrs where additional power and torque is pointless and a waste of time as you won't be able to get traction and you'll be spinning the wheels in 2nd and 3rd in the dry?

Don't get me wrong, I love my little fabia, but it's not exactly the best platform for massive power!

For example, In real life how much quicker is a hybrid turbo car than a mapped standard turbo car ( fabia vrs specifically)

Honestly and in my opinion 220bhp in a front wheel drive is all you need for most things on normal road tyres. Over that and you can't use it so often.

From the point where you can get all the power down without spinning to going very fast is a short time.

I use mine for track days and Santa pod, so the extra is useful. But without the tyres and differential I have it would be difficult to get all the power down until probably 40 or 50mph.

Power is nothing without control, unless you just want to boast about bhp, so you need suspension ,brakes, diff etc... once you go big power. Otherwise you just can't use it very often. I know you said take the cost out, but over 200(ish) bhp it starts to get expensive too. So I understand fully people staying around 200-220bhp. It's the best bang without spending a fortune.

From a slightly different point of view, how much power and torque is it worth having in a fabia?

Taking the cost of modifications out of the equation, there has to be a point in a normal 'daily driver' vrs where additional power and torque is pointless and a waste of time as you won't be able to get traction and you'll be spinning the wheels in 2nd and 3rd in the dry?

Don't get me wrong, I love my little fabia, but it's not exactly the best platform for massive power!

For example, In real life how much quicker is a hybrid turbo car than a mapped standard turbo car ( fabia vrs specifically)

The best "bang for buck" stage is just a decent remap (or maybe a standard 150 turbo upgrade) IMO. Once you pass that stage it gets pricey for little gain. Hybrid/Intercooler/Clutch is a good couple of KK`s for another 30-60bhp. Although if was at the start again, i`d still do it all again After this stage it does start getting even more expensive.

I've never spun the wheels once in my Fabia. Yes, it has a diff etc, but it's also running on budget Barum tyres. I'm probably just not driving it hard enough though, most of the time it's an up-and-down-the-M1 commuting hack.

If it were me spending my money, I'd probably stick at a remap, and then a turbo/clutch if they died (probably replaced with uprated parts). But the whole point of me buying the car that I did is that someone's already done just about everything it's possible to do to a Fabia, and recently enough that all the parts should easily last for the 4+ years I intend to keep the car. It cost a little more than a standard one but nowhere near as much as it would have cost for me to do everything. So as far as bang per buck goes I reckon I've picked up a steal (misleading advert and cost of safe remap aside).

Vry good thread to read, quite informative aswell...

(+1 to all that have said Shark have come of well from this post, and from the open day last week and what they have said here they appear very genuine. When i come to having a remap thats where my money will be going )

Any more updates on this? Was just getting interesting!

I have been following this thread with interest as well. Interestingly, Shark are mentioned freely on here, but on another forum I frequent for Seats, the name gets blanked out for some reason.

Keep the info coming though, ( even in all honesty some of the technical stuff is a bit much for my feeble brain )

There's been a disagreement between Shark and one of the SCN admins. There were various claims thrown around which Ben felt weren't true but the only solution that got offered was that every mention of Shark (whether fact or fiction) would be deleted and the word Shark censored from that point on.

Much as I like some of the people on SCN, the admins aren't always the easiest to get along with. R-Tech in Hinckley is also banned on there, although I don't know the story behind that. Some people say it's simply because they don't pay to sponsor SCN with advertising and that it's unfair for them to get forum publicity for free when Awesome/Jabba/Badger5 etc all chip in with their sponsorship fees.

ben is off work at the moment but im sure when he returns, him and Mikko will be back on with this thread to continue the interesting debate

There's been a disagreement between Shark and one of the SCN admins. There were various claims thrown around which Ben felt weren't true but the only solution that got offered was that every mention of Shark (whether fact or fiction) would be deleted and the word Shark censored from that point on.

Much as I like some of the people on SCN, the admins aren't always the easiest to get along with. R-Tech in Hinckley is also banned on there, although I don't know the story behind that. Some people say it's simply because they don't pay to sponsor SCN with advertising and that it's unfair for them to get forum publicity for free when Awesome/Jabba/Badger5 etc all chip in with their sponsorship fees.

Thanks for that Gavin, I had wondered.

Looking forward to Ben's return then.....